About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9
of defense, we talk about the post office and prepayments being made. there is one truism on both, o s the taxpayer is ultimately on the hook. yes. so it is not an issue is this just a quasi-government organization, both dod and you need prepayments. we're ultimately on the hook the taxpayer is. what concerns me in a time, admitted, mr. chairman your low liquidity. you're not really sure you can get down as low as two days later this year, at a time in which the discussions have been made and i have read about the board of governors and your role. you do believe you have a fiduciary duty in your role to the postal service and in your role, correct? >> mr. chairman, representative, yes. >> that means there's a trust. there's a trust with you and the board of governors not just strictly you but i believe with the postmaster general and others in this situation. what i keep hearing is, well we thought of and we're looking at that. we have a five-year plan that was many years ago. we have discussions that we want to do. we're exploring ideas. these are direct quotes from today, exploring h
of defense is currently spending $10 billion more conducting the war effort in afghanistan this year than was estimated would be necessary. from what we understand, in order to make up for this estimation the department of defense will have to pull from other funds from its base budget, which is difficult because of sequestration and the other long-term spending limits imposed by the budget control act of 2011. the problems with trying to budget and plan for a war a year in advance and how unforeseen costs can arise. at the same time a $10 billion is copulation is a little alarming. -- miss calculation is a little bit alarming. general, can you explain to us how that underestimation occurred? that we insidere u.s. forces in afghanistan under estimated $10 billion for our requirements for this year. i can assure you we have gone back and look at every dollar we have spent to make sure we have spent to good effect. we have significantly reduced the money we are spending in afghanistan. i will go back and take a look at where the projection came from and why we are in the position we are in
suggested the united states would reduce our missile defense system in asia for exchange -- in exchange for chinese help with north korea. it seems to me even though we are being threatened by nuclear attack by the north korean government, first of all is that an accurate statement? if so, explain that if you would. >> no. not an accurate statement. i think it was corrected while i was over there. there was reporting to that effect. what i -- there was no offer, no deal, no contemplation of it. what i did say publicly and i'll say it again, is that the president took specific deployment steps of missile defense in direct response to north korea. and it stands to reason that if the north korean threat disappears, there would be a logical question of whether or not that same level of deployment is necessary. all i stated was a sort of fact based on the rationale of the deployment itself. >> do you think that the united states should give aid to north korea of some type to temper their saber rattling, which they seem to do, about this time every year? >> no. >> all right. thank you for tho
of defense. we built a strengthened homeland security enterprise and a more secure america, better to face the challenges we face. the president'sle budget allows us to build on the progress by preserving core front line operations priorities. at the same time, given the current fiscal environment, this is the third straight year that our budget requests reflects a deduction from the previous year. our request is $800 million below the f.y. 2013 enacted budget. our mission has nod changed and we continue to face evolving threats. we've become more strategic how we use these resources. this is coupled with a unprecedented with a fiscal discipline that has led to $4 billion in cost reductions over the past four years in a process we call efficiency review. before i get to the nuts and bolts of the budget i want to talk about sequestration. >> excuse me. can i ask you to pause a little bit longer. if you could pause for a moment dub. we want to get this quarum ieve we have a .nd if i can find -- here we go i would like to take this opportunity to conduct a brief business meeting -- to consi
at a cost of $12 billion. the official position of taiwan's ministry of national defense remains committed to procuring those submarines from the u.s. however, as the u.s. stopped making these diesel submarines many years ago, the sale has been stalled. i know we worked with france and some of our allies on this. could you advise what the current status of this submarines being acquired by taiwan is? and finally, you don't necessarily have to comment on this. if you'd like to you can, but former -- but the former president languishes today in a jail cell in taiwan. to me it smacks of the criminalization of politics. . stoot extent this administration communicates with the president i urge you to urge president mah to do the humanitarian thing, president chen's health is failing. i now yield to you, thank you. >> thank you, congressman. i appreciate it. i'll take that and just follow up on it. let me see what we can do about that. on burma, you are absolutely correct. there will be bumps in the road. i hope not big ones. obviously things are happening today that were unimaginable a few year
you were in china that you suggested the united states would reduce our missile defense system in asia for exchange, in exchange for chinese help with north korea. it seems to me that even though we're being threatened by nuclear attack by the north korean government, first of all, is that an accurate statement? and if so, explain that if you would. >> no, not an accurate statement. i think it was corrected while i was over there. it was reporting to that effect. there was no offer, no deal, no contemplation of it. what i did say publicly and i will say it again, is that the president took specific deployment steps of missile defense in direct response to north korea. and it stands to reason that if the north korean threat disappears, there would be a logical question of whether or not th that same level of deployment is necessary. it's all, i stated, was sort of a fact based on the rationale of deployment itself. >> do you think the united states should give aid to north korea of some type to temper their saber rattling, which they seem to do, about this time ever you? >> no. >> thank
the overall challenges of trimming the defense budget. this program is in sularecause , delays, and the weight has been structured. -- weight has been structured. it's most defensive effective attribute may not be all of its radars and since ours -- sensors and missiles. it may well be the way it's been designed to evade budget cutters in washington. sunday at 8:00 on c-span q&a. >> earlier today postmaster general donahoe spoke at the national press club, speaking about postal reform ahe saturday delivery. here's what he had to say. >> congress faces a simple choice. give the organization the flexibility to operate more effectively. in case you're wondering what that cost might be, the cost of ,ropping up our broken model including resolving all the debts and the false we currently can't afford to pay, might be in the neighborhood of $58 billion trade that's just through 2017. it would be completely unnecessary. it may shock you to learn that the postal service could be profitable today, and in the long-term future. we just need to operate differently. i'm optimistic. i'm optimistic that cong
challenges of terming the defense budget. this program is in someway singular in terms of its costs and delays in the way it has been structured. as i write in the piece, it's most effective defense attribute may not be all of its radars and sensors and missiles and stealth technology and ability to have -- it might be the design to evade budget covers from washington. washington post senior correspondent sunday at 8 p.m. on c-span's "q&a." >> secretary of state john kerry and mexican foreign secretary spoke to reporters following the meeting in washington. they expressed condolences for the people of boston. the two leaders met to discuss u.s.-mexico relations, immigration reform, and president obama's trip to mexico next month. >> good morning, everybody. before we begin, i want to just say that as a father and grandfather, my thoughts are of course in my hometown right now, boston, where events are still unfolding and the entire city is on lockdown. we are continuing to learn every moment about the attack on monday and the pursuit of justice following it. it is fair to say that t
of trimming the defense program. this program is singular in terms of its costs and the way as i write in d, the piece, the attribute may not bawl of the missiles and stealth technology and the ability to fight supersonic speed. it may be the way it is designed to avoid budget cutters in washington. on re on sunday at 8:00 c-span's "q&a." >> at a senate hearing to discuss the immigration bill this week. homeland security janet napolitano was scheduled to testify but was unable to do due to the ongoing investigation there. a member of the u.s. commission on civil rights as well as former c.b.o. director testified and discussed concerns and the benefits in the legislation. his is an hour and 40 minutes. >> the committee can come to order please. . apologize for the delay as you know there is a great .elay going on in massachusetts i hope everybody can well understand why the secretary napolitano will not be here. testimony. dule her -- hopefully senator feinstein won't mind me mentioning but she was saying and i agree on how proud we are on how law enforcement responded. i am distressed to h
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9